Proposal: 2016 Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part VI

Status
Not open for further replies.

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
Ya, Cory Schneider, a top 5 proven young goalie at that time, returned only a 9th overall pick.

Murray has had a great resume to date but isnt as proven in the NHL as Schneider though some of u may disagree. I wanna see another great season first.

The Schneider trade should be proof that young elite goalies are worth a ton, not the other way around. A deal with the Oilers 7th overall + more was on the table, but the Canucks opted to move Schneider to New Jersey for less because it was out of the conference. The point is, a team was willing to pay more than the 9th for Schneider.

Vancouver also dealt from a position of weakness because of the Luongo fiasco. They weren't able to drag out a Schneider trade and move him for the best possible return.

Varlamov got Washington Colorado's first right after they were one of the worst teams in the league.

Even Lehner got us a 21st overall pick+3.5M cap dump.

If Murray has a strong regular season and another strong playoff run, someone might offer a lot for him. It isn't like Murray is Andrew Hammond who rose from obscurity to have some amazing run and can be expected to fall back to earth. Murray has been seen as a blue chip goalie prospect for a while. Toronto asked for him in the Kessel deal and were shot down. An "unnamed western team" (Calgary?) apparently also wanted him sometime before the big run last year.

Pens aren't trading Murray (if they do) until after the season. You are right about wanting to see another season of play before deciding what he is. There's a lot of evidence to suggest that if Murray has another strong year, he could fetch a lot in a trade. It'd probably be bigger than the Schneider return.
 

Liver King

Registered User
Jan 23, 2016
7,430
5,266
I would trade our first for Bishop depending on where we are at the deadline (along with a negotiated contract extension obviously)
 

ChelFan31

Registered User
Mar 22, 2016
593
32
I would trade our first for Bishop depending on where we are at the deadline (along with a negotiated contract extension obviously)

that deal in a nutshell would be pure admittance by management of not having the right vision for this team. They already had Bishop within the system, then to acquire him back after having made waves of having to move him to make room for Lehner/Anderson tandem. IMO I Cannot foresee that happening. Could you foresee that?
 

Benjamin

Differently Financed
Jun 14, 2010
31,118
438
yes
Bishop will be one of the next massive mistake of contracts handed out to a desperate GM.
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Knowing how our org operates, I imagine we will wait and give one of Driedger/Hogberg a chance to be the starter when they are ready, and as a result either ride Andy until he's broken, or acquire a veteran "placeholder" starting goalie until one of our kids are ready.

This is not the org, in my eyes, that make trades for in-their-prime starting goalies asking for a top-5 salary at their position (Bishop) or young goalies who will command a premium-plus return via trade without first trying our own guys out at the position first.

That's just how I see it playing out.
 

Hale The Villain

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2008
25,658
13,243
If Ottawa needs to move a 1st (or more) for a goalie then the organization has seriously screwed up asset management.

They have had plenty of time to groom a replacement for Anderson.

There's no question the Sens have awful asset management, but I don't think this would be bad asset management.

We had a replacement for Anderson. We traded him for a 1st (White).

Given that we have already gained a 1st-round quality prospect in exchange for our young future starting goalie, I don't really have a problem trading a 1st + more for a far superior starting goalie. In terms of assets in-versus-out, it's almost even.
 

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,292
3,700
Knowing how our org operates, I imagine we will wait and give one of Driedger/Hogberg a chance to be the starter when they are ready, and as a result either ride Andy until he's broken, or acquire a veteran "placeholder" starting goalie until one of our kids are ready.

This is not the org, in my eyes, that make trades for in-their-prime starting goalies asking for a top-5 salary at their position (Bishop) or young goalies who will command a premium-plus return via trade without first trying our own guys out at the position first.

That's just how I see it playing out.

It's a shame. By far the most important position. If you're going to go crazy on a player, this is where you should be doing it.
 

Liver King

Registered User
Jan 23, 2016
7,430
5,266
Bishop will be one of the next massive mistake of contracts handed out to a desperate GM.

or by a GM who is trying to contend. Throwing money or assets to gain a massive improvement in arguably a teams most important position has absolutely nothing to do with desperation.
 
Last edited:

50 in 07

Registered User
Feb 10, 2016
1,953
357
There's no question the Sens have awful asset management, but I don't think this would be bad asset management.

We had a replacement for Anderson. We traded him for a 1st (White).

Given that we have already gained a 1st-round quality prospect in exchange for our young future starting goalie, I don't really have a problem trading a 1st + more for a far superior starting goalie. In terms of assets in-versus-out, it's almost even.

or by a GM who is trying to contend. Throwing money or assets to gain a massive improvement in arguably a teams most important position has absolutely nothing to do with desperation.

Yes, we likely need an upgrade in nets especially since Anderson is getting up there in age. That being said there will be goalies becoming available due to the expansion draft, ones that we likely wouldn't have to pay a first for. Let's take Fleury for an example, assuming Ottawa is on his list or he waives for us. I doubt Pittsburgh would expect a first rounder in a deal for him. Is the upgrade of Bishop over Fleury (or a comparable guy) really worth losing a first for. Not to mention we would then have to probably give Bishop a contract at least equivalent to one he would have gotten in FA.
 

Hale The Villain

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2008
25,658
13,243
Yes, we likely need an upgrade in nets especially since Anderson is getting up there in age. That being said there will be goalies becoming available due to the expansion draft, ones that we likely wouldn't have to pay a first for. Let's take Fleury for an example, assuming Ottawa is on his list or he waives for us. I doubt Pittsburgh would expect a first rounder in a deal for him. Is the upgrade of Bishop over Fleury (or a comparable guy) really worth losing a first for. Not to mention we would then have to probably give Bishop a contract at least equivalent to one he would have gotten in FA.

I was talking about giving up a 1st + more for Matt Murray.

I wouldn't give up much for Fleury. His NMC and playoff resume lowers his value significantly. When you consider the limited number of goalie spots open and the coming expansion, his value is probably close to zero. If he has a bad year his value might even end up negative.
 

Liver King

Registered User
Jan 23, 2016
7,430
5,266
Yes, we likely need an upgrade in nets especially since Anderson is getting up there in age. That being said there will be goalies becoming available due to the expansion draft, ones that we likely wouldn't have to pay a first for. Let's take Fleury for an example, assuming Ottawa is on his list or he waives for us. I doubt Pittsburgh would expect a first rounder in a deal for him. Is the upgrade of Bishop over Fleury (or a comparable guy) really worth losing a first for. Not to mention we would then have to probably give Bishop a contract at least equivalent to one he would have gotten in FA.

Yeah I think there will be some good goalies available. I wouldn't be surprised, just as some have already suggested, that Sens management waits it out and hopes Drieger/OConnor/Hogberg pan out.

Getting a legit number one goalie has to be a priority next summer imo, and Bishop is simply the best goalie available. Depending on our position at the deadline, I personally would be willing to move our first contingent on a contract being in place.

It would however be much cheaper to acquire a guy like MAF - I'm not really a fan but Ottawa could be a good place for him. Regardless a top goalie would do a lot for this team, and we will need one soon enough. Like I said I bring up Bish because he is the best one available, but there will be a few options that open up this summer for management to explore.
 

trentmccleary

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
22,226
1,100
Alfie-Ville
Visit site
As for Fleury, he's about the last goalie I'd ever want on my team. He's collapsed so many times in big situations and Ottawa wants to be a successful playoff team. I don't know how we could ever do that with a guy like MAF in goal. Everyone on the team would be just waiting for him to implode in April. Not only this but he actually makes more money than Andy, which is a big deal for a budget team.

I mentioned Lalime and Clouthier because they were the best examples of playoff choking goalies I could think of besides MAF.

Clouthier stunk period, at all times of year.
MAF settled down in the regular season a number of years ago (like 6). He may have settled down in the postseason 3 years ago. He's been to the Finals twice and won a Cup. As he's matured, his game has been more technical/ less athleticism. He's clearly in the top-20 goalies, probably somewhere between 11-15th. Playoffs? ... If we don't replace Anderson adequately by the time he starts declining, there won't be any playoff games to blow. I hated Fleury for his first 4-5 seasons, but he's not that guy anymore. At that same point, we had garbage like Gerber, Auld, Leclaire and Elliott. I read your comments as if "acquiring Fleury will prevent us from acquiring a Vaezina challenger". Well my position is that "acquiring Fleury will prevent us from blowing 4 seasons again with the bums I named above".

If Ottawa needs to move a 1st (or more) for a goalie then the organization has seriously screwed up asset management.

They have had plenty of time to groom a replacement for Anderson.

Anderson makes relatively little next season on a team that doesn't sign front-loaded deals. They were making him tradeable or giving him acceptable back up money for his last year because they didn't believe that he'd be the team's starting goalie at 36yo.

Everything was planned around Lehner's ascension and he's gone. Drieger, O'Conner, Hogberg aren't exactly knocking on the door right now and the clock is about to strike midnight. We can give them a chance, but we need another goalie to get us to the point when they're ready to challenge.
 

BK201

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
10,815
308
that deal in a nutshell would be pure admittance by management of not having the right vision for this team. They already had Bishop within the system, then to acquire him back after having made waves of having to move him to make room for Lehner/Anderson tandem. IMO I Cannot foresee that happening. Could you foresee that?

I know what your saying but as long as they win no one will care.
 

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
Backup plan expansion draft related 2017 off season goalie related trades if Anderson regresses...........

-Anderson to PITs for Fleury (Pits needs to shed NMC/Gets veteran backup for Murray)

-Anderson+(???) to CHI for Crawford (Disclaimer, I don't see this one happening......but who knows the Blackhawks are always trying to clear cap and maybe they have the same hard on we do for bringing in local players. Obviously it is a contradiction because if Anderson has regressed to necessitate the trade....why would they want him?)

-Methot to COL for Calvin Pickard or Semyon Varlamov/Anderson to another team for a late pick if Varlamov or Hammond w/Methot ot COL if Pickard (Beauchemin waives his NMC or is bought out. COL protects 4-4 in the expansion draft. Get a big minute munching #3 LD to replace an ageing Beauchemin. Ottawa only does this trade if they feel strongly that Methot will be taken in the expansion draft because they cannot protect him.)

-Anderson and Erik Karlsson to MTL for Eller/Desharnais/Angrighetto (helps us clear cap since we're a budget team and according to MTL people on the trade board these three are really good players that other teams should take in packages for stars)
 

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
Maybe Foligno in CLB ,with half his salary retained could be useful ...maybe??

I don't think they do that. They are a budget team, it would make more sense for them to keep him and hope he bounced back than to retain half his salary and then pay nearly 1M for a replacement body on the roster. He isn't a Clarkson level albatross or anything, he seems to be in sort of a similar situation contract value wise to Bobby Ryan. As in he is a player who signed at a very advantageous time and as a result is overpaid relative to his position, but can still be a good player and contribute. (not saying Ryan and Foligno are equal)

Foligno is a good player who probably would have gotten somewhere around 4M based on his career average. He makes 5.5M with a scary amount of term.

He also might have a full NTC. Per generalfanager: NMC for all years, NTC for 2015-16 through 2018-19. Partial NTC in 2019-20 and 2020-21 I assume because they stipulate that it is a partial starting in 2019 that it must be a full for the previous years he has a NTC. Would he waive to go to Ottawa? Maybe. But I don't think we take on that contract and I don't think CBJ retains.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
I don't think they do that. They are a budget team, it would make more sense for them to keep him and hope he bounced back than to retain half his salary and then pay nearly 1M for a replacement body on the roster. He isn't a Clarkson level albatross or anything, he seems to be in sort of a similar situation contract value wise to Bobby Ryan. As in he is a player who signed at a very advantageous time and as a result is overpaid relative to his position, but can still be a good player and contribute. (not saying Ryan and Foligno are equal)

Foligno is a good player who probably would have gotten somewhere around 4M based on his career average. He makes 5.5M with a scary amount of term.

He also might have a full NTC. Per generalfanager: NMC for all years, NTC for 2015-16 through 2018-19. Partial NTC in 2019-20 and 2020-21 I assume because they stipulate that it is a partial starting in 2019 that it must be a full for the previous years he has a NTC. Would he waive to go to Ottawa? Maybe. But I don't think we take on that contract and I don't think CBJ retains.
Yeah ok that makes sense for sure ,just trying to look for some sort of LW option to help round out our top 9 .That wont cost a arm and leg .Macarther,s concussion troubles,make me wonder if we will have get him back to the way he was.Its been sooo long since we have a good two way LW in the top 6 :cry:
 

sens613

Registered User
Apr 12, 2012
908
0
Would he really want to stay with the Pens if it becomes clear that they don't want/need him with the emergence of Murray and the expansion draft looming?

Also can't the Pens as a last resort simply buy him out. Obviously they'd prefer to trade him but if that doesn't happen...

If you're fleury and feel like your teammates still believe in you I doubt you'd care if management asked you to waive.

Your feelings and interactions with the guys you're on the ice with and see everyday would probably matter more.

Also if you can name 12 teams you can't go to , you just pick the teams most likely to trade for you not where yu want to go the least making it very hard for management to trade you ,I. E. Leave teams like mtl nyr chi LA bos ect open to beING traded to even if yu don't want to play there.
 

Pierre from Orleans

Registered User
May 9, 2007
26,100
17,273
Backup plan expansion draft related 2017 off season goalie related trades if Anderson regresses...........

-Anderson to PITs for Fleury (Pits needs to shed NMC/Gets veteran backup for Murray)

-Anderson+(???) to CHI for Crawford (Disclaimer, I don't see this one happening......but who knows the Blackhawks are always trying to clear cap and maybe they have the same hard on we do for bringing in local players. Obviously it is a contradiction because if Anderson has regressed to necessitate the trade....why would they want him?)

-Methot to COL for Calvin Pickard or Semyon Varlamov/Anderson to another team for a late pick if Varlamov or Hammond w/Methot ot COL if Pickard (Beauchemin waives his NMC or is bought out. COL protects 4-4 in the expansion draft. Get a big minute munching #3 LD to replace an ageing Beauchemin. Ottawa only does this trade if they feel strongly that Methot will be taken in the expansion draft because they cannot protect him.)

-Anderson and Erik Karlsson to MTL for Eller/Desharnais/Angrighetto (helps us clear cap since we're a budget team and according to MTL people on the trade board these three are really good players that other teams should take in packages for stars)

What the????
 

kaws

Registered User
Apr 10, 2010
317
2
-Anderson and Erik Karlsson to MTL for Eller/Desharnais/Angrighetto

trident.gif
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
I could totally see us doing Anderson for Fleury in the offseason.

There might be some other shenanigans involved in the trade, most likely us finding a way to get Pittsburgh to eat some of his salary, but it's totally something I'd see us doing. Fleury is exactly the kind of placeholder veteran goalie we would want to bridge us to Driedger/Hogberg - young enough that he's still got a lot left in the tank, but old enough that by the time one of our kids are hypothetically ready that it won't seem ridiculous for us to make the switch.

Yeah, I can see it. Not saying it's the best move we could make, but if we could convince Pittsburgh to eat a mil /mil and a half, it's absolutely a trade I could see this org making.
 

The Professional

Sens Army Special Operations Command
Dec 4, 2005
2,510
1,520
Aylmer, Québec
Backup plan expansion draft related 2017 off season goalie related trades if Anderson regresses...........

-Anderson to PITs for Fleury (Pits needs to shed NMC/Gets veteran backup for Murray)

-Anderson+(???) to CHI for Crawford (Disclaimer, I don't see this one happening......but who knows the Blackhawks are always trying to clear cap and maybe they have the same hard on we do for bringing in local players. Obviously it is a contradiction because if Anderson has regressed to necessitate the trade....why would they want him?)

-Methot to COL for Calvin Pickard or Semyon Varlamov/Anderson to another team for a late pick if Varlamov or Hammond w/Methot ot COL if Pickard (Beauchemin waives his NMC or is bought out. COL protects 4-4 in the expansion draft. Get a big minute munching #3 LD to replace an ageing Beauchemin. Ottawa only does this trade if they feel strongly that Methot will be taken in the expansion draft because they cannot protect him.)

-Anderson and Erik Karlsson to MTL for Eller/Desharnais/Angrighetto (helps us clear cap since we're a budget team and according to MTL people on the trade board these three are really good players that other teams should take in packages for stars)

nick-young-confused-face-300x256_nqlyaa.png
 

Blotto71

I was wrong...the worst is NOT behind us.
May 12, 2013
1,881
671
Over There
If Detroit finally succumbs to the inevitable and decides to rebuild, perhaps the goaltender to target is Mrazek? He's 24 and still growing - took a nice step last year. If Detroit decides it's time to pull the plug he'd be a great acquisition.

2017 1st + White + Hogberg (assuming Dorion gets him signed and he comes to NA)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->